sennheiser sounding speakers

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
Based on the answers so far there seems to be a consensus that the room acoustics is the most important factor and that I should look into open baffle designs and fullrange drivers...

Ok, this is not an option to me right now, I don't have the budged for this... all I'm trying is to get a enjoyable speaker with clean midrange close to the one perceived in sennheiser headphones, lets say HD580.

Leaving sound imaging out of the equation and focusing on tonal balance *only*, what budget speaker kit/DIY design, or what drivers would you suggest to start fiddling with

Thanks
 
You should check out speakers with constant directivity, like the Linkwitz Orion

????????? The Orion is about as far from constant directivity as it gets. I think you meant the Gedlee designs?

Speakers with narrow directivity are the way to go as others have mentioned. These usually employ waveguides on the HF driver. There's a couple of DIY designs available and quite a few in progress as WGs are all the rage......and for good reason!
 
Based on the answers so far there seems to be a consensus that the room acoustics is the most important factor and that I should look into open baffle designs and fullrange drivers...

Ok, this is not an option to me right now, I don't have the budged for this... all I'm trying is to get a enjoyable speaker with clean midrange close to the one perceived in sennheiser headphones, lets say HD580.

Leaving sound imaging out of the equation and focusing on tonal balance *only*, what budget speaker kit/DIY design, or what drivers would you suggest to start fiddling with

Thanks

Your observations are a bit far from fact. A couple of things to consider.....

WG loaded tweeters will give you the effect you desire on the top end. There's been some excellent work done by Zaph and others with large diameter Waveguides and dome tweeters. You'll only need one per speaker preferably a dome that can cross low considering your budget. The new Dayton RS28F has shown to be capable down to 1.4khz 4th order.....probobly even lower in a 10" WG.

For bass, exciting the least bit from the room is accomplished with OB/Dipole. Two woofers are always better than one and the H-frame is simple to build. A pair of 12 or 15" woofers per side will get the job done quite nicely.
 
Disabled Account
Joined 2008
????????? The Orion is about as far from constant directivity as it gets. I think you meant the Gedlee designs?
In my opinion, the Gedlee speakers are far from having constant directivity. They are increasingly directional at higher frequencies, and omni a lower frequencies. The transition from omni to directional is remarkably smooth though, much more so than any other design I've seen.

My point is: a proper dipole maintains the dipole pattern over the entire frequency range - its dispersion is the same at all frequencies.
 
A dipole speaker is constant directivity? Thats so obviously wrong, i just cant belief you really wrote that! Every membrane beams with rising frequency and the dipole pattern has nothing to do with that at all. Please dont confuse the new members for the sake of your arguments.

Besides, Gedlees speakers may not be true cd but they are as close as one can get in the real world with all of its constraints, such as having speakers that are smaller than the room you live in.
 
Disabled Account
Joined 2008
This is a measurement from a dipole speaker at angles 0, 30, 45 and 60 degrees. If this isnt good CD over a very wide frequency range, I dont know what is.

160546d1267501933-violet-dsp-evolution-open-baffle-project-firstpolar.jpg

Thread here:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/161768-violet-dsp-evolution-open-baffle-project-4.html

My point is that a proper dipole can have quite close to perfect CD. Making such a speaker takes more than just putting a driver on a flat piece of wood.
 
hey Stig, for sure dipoles have constant post Signature over a wide range of words... :)

it's a very interesting discussion.

still the primary goal of the thread is suggesting a good project to its starter, for which would really help to know the budget, the amp/source/room and what kind of material he wants to listen to? okmat any hint?
 
Well I'd like something around 350 usd for drivers and xover parts, the room is small 4 x 6 m (12 x 18 foot). My amp is a harman-kardon avr 230. I have a pair of seas CA18RNX woofers and 27TDFC tweeters, so a design based on those drivers would be a +

I made a xover for those drivers some time ago but would like to improve the sound and make it cleaner and more detailed. Maybe I should start a different thread for this?
 
Disabled Account
Joined 2008
Have you tried near-field listening? 1 meter or less speaker-to-listener distance. Its a great solution for smaller rooms, if the speakers are appropriate. A small two-way should work well.

We got a little bit carried away with dipoles I guess... because they can sound really good. Such speakers tend to be rather complicated though, as they would be 3- or 4-way, and require active XO and a lot of EQ, and of course multiple power amps.
 
Yes, near field listening greatly improves the imaging but is not very cool to be sitting 40 cm away from the tv screen...

In Zaph's site, in the tmm waveguide project Zaph writes

With this system, there seems to be a little less room interaction or early reflections in the mid treble. I noticed this after a few minutes with familiar music. It's a little hard to describe the effect, but it reminds me a bit of wearing a good pair of headphones except with forward imaging rather than "between the ears" imaging.
This might be what i'm looking for... and it uses the same drivers I already have except for the number... 4 CA18RNX instead of 2.
Can someone help to modify this design to make it a TM... and ideas on how to build the waveguide out of wood would be cool to since that company will not ship outside US/Canada/UK :(

Thanks
 
Here's a 2way XO i've used with the CA18RLY in a sealed enclosure. The RLY is pretty much a drop in repl for the RNX and i only used it as i was looking for a small sealed enclosure.

An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.


Building the guide from wood or cut directly into a hardwood baffle is a cool, Amphion type of idea....and also VERY difficult to do as it would require the tooling of a bit matching the profile of the waveguide and a drill press and DIY fixture to do the cutting. Contact a local U.S. general importer to purchase and ship the waveguides to you for the extra cost instead. Well worth it and needed for profile match/measuring if you intend to DIY it in the baffle anyways. Hope this helps.

BTW......i've built 3 sets of WG speakers to date and love each and every one of em. Here's a pic of a pair of WgTMs in progress right now

UnfinishedMT.jpg
 
all I'm trying is to get a enjoyable speaker with clean midrange close to the one perceived in sennheiser headphones, lets say HD580.

Leaving sound imaging out of the equation and focusing on tonal balance *only*, what budget speaker kit/DIY design, or what drivers would you suggest to start fiddling with

I've been trying for a few years now with my first "from scratch" build to achieve what it sounds like you want: similar timbral balance to my Sennheiser HD580's. I've just found these headphones to have a more natural and realistic sounding tonal balance than anything I have heard so far. They sound good on all recordings to me.

My speakers are 2way closed box with active sub bass modules. They use the Scan Speak 9500 tweeters and the Audax HM170Z18 as a midbass. I've been somewhat successful but haven't got close enough to be completely happy.

In my opinion, my Sennheisers have treble that reminds me most of silk dome tweeters. The metal domes, ribbons, and compression drivers I have heard all have different character in the treble and silk domes seem closest to the Sennheiser's to me. I'm pretty happy with the 9500's in this regard.

It's the upper midrange/lower treble that has frustrated me so far. My speakers have a forwardness in this range that I haven't quite been able to get rid of. I suspect the HM170's but I can't be sure it's not the tweeters either. I've been playing around a lot using Thuneau's Frequency Allocator to tune the timbral balance. This has been an invaluable tool to get instant feedback on XO changes. I've taken a lot of measurements on and off axis and tried many different XO's but there is this hint of forwardness on some female vocals that I just can't quite get rid of. The HM170 has a resonance at 2800 Hz so this is why I suspect it, but I also notice a fairly broad hump off axis in the 9500's FR response that might be causing it. I have some more playing around to do, but I'm leaning toward going to a 3 way with a smaller mid that has cleaner and more extended response into the lower treble.

Warning, lots of subjective impressions stated below! I'm focusing on tonal balance here rather than other areas such as imaging. Don't take this as an overall impression of the speakers or drivers mentioned below.

While I can't give any specific recommendations for kits, I can offer some feedback on some kits and commercial speakers that I have heard. The Gedlee Summas do not have a similar timbral balance to the Sennheisers in my opinion. I'm not saying this is good or bad, but they did not strike me as sounding like the Sennheisers, especially with classical/orchestral music. They are definitely worth a listen though. I've heard a couple models of Magnepan's, they as well had a subjectively different timbre compared to the Sennheisers. Various Paradigm and B&W's with metal dome tweeters have a bit different character in the treble than the Sennheisers. Kind of hard to describe, but I feel I can hear a certain character with metal dome tweeters that is nice on some recordings and not as nice on others. I have a pair of BESL Model 1.2 kits that are no longer made that use the Vifa D25 and I have a similar opinion of their treble as with the Paradigms and B&W's. I heard a pair of Dynaudio Contour 2.3 (2.5?) quite a few years ago. I'm not sure what my opinion would be today, but at the time I liked the sound so much, especially the treble, that it motivated me to go with a silk dome tweeter.

Dan
 
I've been trying for a few years now with my first "from scratch" build to achieve what it sounds like you want: similar timbral balance to my Sennheiser HD580's. I've just found these headphones to have a more natural and realistic sounding tonal balance than anything I have heard so far. They sound good on all recordings to me.

My speakers are 2way closed box with active sub bass modules. They use the Scan Speak 9500 tweeters and the Audax HM170Z18 as a midbass. I've been somewhat successful but haven't got close enough to be completely happy.

In my opinion, my Sennheisers have treble that reminds me most of silk dome tweeters. The metal domes, ribbons, and compression drivers I have heard all have different character in the treble and silk domes seem closest to the Sennheiser's to me. I'm pretty happy with the 9500's in this regard.

It's the upper midrange/lower treble that has frustrated me so far. My speakers have a forwardness in this range that I haven't quite been able to get rid of. I suspect the HM170's but I can't be sure it's not the tweeters either. I've been playing around a lot using Thuneau's Frequency Allocator to tune the timbral balance. This has been an invaluable tool to get instant feedback on XO changes. I've taken a lot of measurements on and off axis and tried many different XO's but there is this hint of forwardness on some female vocals that I just can't quite get rid of. The HM170 has a resonance at 2800 Hz so this is why I suspect it, but I also notice a fairly broad hump off axis in the 9500's FR response that might be causing it. I have some more playing around to do, but I'm leaning toward going to a 3 way with a smaller mid that has cleaner and more extended response into the lower treble.

Thanks Dan, this is a very illustrating post. I wasn't aware of the Thuneau's Frequency Allocator tool, gonna try it right away. So far I've been using the virtual beringher DCX2496 simulator included with LSPcad, but is kinda hard to tweak real time + I find it hard to duplicate the tonal balance in passive xover parts.

Two questions:

I'm not familiar with the drivers you're using, are there any similarities soundwise with the Audax HM170Z18 woofer and the Seas CA18RNX?

Out of curiosity, when you adjust the xover to sound the closest to sennheiser tonal balance, is the frequency response flat at all?

Warning, lots of subjective impressions stated below! I'm focusing on tonal balance here rather than other areas such as imaging. Don't take this as an overall impression of the speakers or drivers mentioned below.

While I can't give any specific recommendations for kits, I can offer some feedback on some kits and commercial speakers that I have heard. The Gedlee Summas do not have a similar timbral balance to the Sennheisers in my opinion. I'm not saying this is good or bad, but they did not strike me as sounding like the Sennheisers, especially with classical/orchestral music. They are definitely worth a listen though. I've heard a couple models of Magnepan's, they as well had a subjectively different timbre compared to the Sennheisers. Various Paradigm and B&W's with metal dome tweeters have a bit different character in the treble than the Sennheisers. Kind of hard to describe, but I feel I can hear a certain character with metal dome tweeters that is nice on some recordings and not as nice on others. I have a pair of BESL Model 1.2 kits that are no longer made that use the Vifa D25 and I have a similar opinion of their treble as with the Paradigms and B&W's. I heard a pair of Dynaudio Contour 2.3 (2.5?) quite a few years ago. I'm not sure what my opinion would be today, but at the time I liked the sound so much, especially the treble, that it motivated me to go with a silk dome tweeter.

Dan

While many ppl don't like subjective impressions on speaker building, to me, they are essential to understand how a speaker sounds like. Specially in DIY audio because is not possible to go to a store an listen to the speaker before building it.
To have an idea of which DIY design sounds similar to which commercial speaker is of great help, i'm sure a lot of ppl will think the same way.
 
Disabled Account
Joined 2008
Frankly, I don't think any Sennheiser headphones are good references for tonal balance. I own both HD580 and 600, both have their flaws. 580 is rolled off in the top end, and its bass is weak. The 600 is much better in the top end and midrange, but is even weaker in the bass. In my ears, the Beyerdynamic DT770PRO I also own is much better.
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.